List of moderators

[Pancho]

Would be good to know who to reach out to with questions or to voice something you're unhappy with.

I've mentioned this previously but I'm always available via pm for advice or information - within the confines of GDPR, of course.

With regard to warnings and/or bans, I can only comment accurately on those with which I've been involved. For other moderator actions I can only provide an informed opinion.

 

[Baz]

There has only been 1 person banned today and that wasn't for nothing and was after they had been warned many times.

Your own warning was for effectively calling someone a nonce - you didn't even get warned the first time, just post deleted - so you then repeated it.

Where did I call someone a nonce? Saying I wouldn't trust someone who acts so bizarrely around my kids does not insinuate that at all.

People had posts deleted for suggesting Hetton was a mod for god sake. Totally over the top and its ruining the forum.

Also I didn't repeat it, my second post was completely different.

 

[RTGAdmin]

Where did I call someone a nonce? Saying I wouldn't trust someone who acts so bizarrely around my kids does not insinuate that at all.

People had posts deleted for suggesting Hetton was a mod for god sake. Totally over the top and its ruining the forum.

But she isn't a mod, that is misinformation, so posts like that will always be deleted from threads which are supposed to be about football and future managers.
You are entitled to your opinion, but its far from OTT for the moderators to delete off-topic and incorrect information.

 

[Baz]

But she isn't a mod, that is misinformation, so posts like that will always be deleted from threads which are supposed to be about football and future managers.
You are entitled to your opinion, but its far from OTT for the moderators to delete off-topic and incorrect information.

Misinformation I give up, I really do. If you deleted that all the time there would be about 5 posts left on here a day man.

Plenty others are getting sick of it, hence threads like this. Its OK though, you crack on and keep making this place worse.

Let's just call it a day and leave it there.

 

[MackneyHackem]

There has only been 1 person banned today and that wasn't for nothing and was after they had been warned many times.

Your own warning was for effectively calling someone a nonce - you didn't even get warned the first time, just post deleted - so you then repeated it.

 

[luvulongtime]

is @Roger not on here anymore ?

 

[woodlebert]

What is and isn't allowed

Yes. The issue I spoke of is that the list is massively open to interpretation to different mods in different moods, so it’s really inconsistent what is ban/warning worthy and what isn’t

Your own warning was for effectively calling someone a nonce

Fair

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

But she isn't a mod, that is misinformation, so posts like that will always be deleted from threads which are supposed to be about football and future managers.
You are entitled to your opinion, but it’s far from OTT for the moderators to delete off-topic and incorrect information.

Genuine question; can you see how many people are irritated by the poster? This isn’t a handful of people

The poster clearly knows that it’s annoying, and ramps it up.

I’ve gone the ignore route, it doesn’t really help

(Posted as someone who can be a pain in the arse at times too)

 

[chunksafc]

Can someone also explain why I have been banned from the Still thread please?

All i said was it made the board impossible read, which is my personal opinion

Or does having a message saying I have insufficient privileges to post on that thread mean something else? I've never seen it before

 

[R5Skywalker]

Your own warning was for effectively calling someone a nonce - you didn't even get warned the first time, just post deleted - so you then repeated it.

This reply has had me in stitches man

 

[Wayne The Punk]

Can someone also explain why I have been banned from the Still thread please?

All i said was it made the board impossible read, which is my personal opinion

Or does having a message saying I have insufficient privileges to post on that thread mean something else? I've never seen it before

I got 3 messages saying I had insufficient privileges, I dont know why, and it didnt stop me posting, maybe a mod was having a breakdown?

 

[Ciro_DiMarzio]

But she isn't a mod, that is misinformation, so posts like that will always be deleted from threads which are supposed to be about football and future managers.
You are entitled to your opinion, but its far from OTT for the moderators to delete off-topic and incorrect information.

What is thecrack with @mod18? Signed up on 19th April 2024, last seen on 19th April 2024 and has zero posts but is listed as a staff member.

 

[Dogbark]

Genuine question; can you see how many people are irritated by the poster? This isn’t a handful of people

The poster clearly knows that it’s annoying, and ramps it up.

I’ve gone the ignore route, it doesn’t really help

(Posted as someone who can be a pain in the arse at times too)

I don't get that tbh. It's on my ignore list and it works a treat.

 

[Ghfd]

What is thecrack with @mod18? Signed up on 19th April 2024, last seen on 19th April 2024 and has zero posts but is listed as a staff member.

It’s me. Woooo

 

[wisemensaysteve]

I got a warning and I hadn't even used a banned word, yet I see the word all over this site, I am still hurting

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

I don't get that tbh. It's on my ignore list and it works a treat.

Sometimes it does. But it starts so many threads, that I now can’t really get involved in if the topic is interesting to me

I refuse to believe that she is interested in everything.

 

[woodlebert]

I just wanted to say what a tough job the mods do on here

Best,
- Bert

 

[Apache Inbound]

The list of moderators who are prepared to be identified is here

Which begs the question - why would someone who has access to the admin tools choose to lurk anonymously in the dark?

Surely transparency is how healthy communities operate both on and offline.

‘Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants’

 

[RTGAdmin]

Which begs the question - why would someone who has access to the admin tools choose to lurk anonymously in the dark?

Surely transparency is how healthy communities operate both on and offline.

‘Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants’

Sometimes because they have been here for years and just don't want to change their relationship with other board members, new moderators are often quite reluctant to take up the role, and are re-assured by the fact that they can drop out at any time without it affecting them.

Also because unfortunately some of the lowlife on here end up threatening moderators and their friends and families both online and offline and it can become a very unpleasant role and become very personal when it needn't be so.

As long as the board rules are being applied I don't really care whether a moderator is visible or not.

One unfortunate side-effect, if a moderator is invisible, it is usually @Pancho that gets the blame whether he has been online or not. Fortunately his skin is now thicker than an elephant's.

Ultimately the buck always stops at me.

 

[Apache Inbound]

Sometimes because they have been here for years and just don't want to change their relationship with other board members, new moderators are often quite reluctant to take up the role, and are re-assured by the fact that they can drop out at any time without it affecting them.

Also because unfortunately some of the lowlife on here end up threatening moderators and their friends and families both online and offline and it can become a very unpleasant role and become very personal when it needn't be so.

As long as the board rules are being applied I don't really care whether a moderator is visible or not.

One unfortunate side-effect, if a moderator is invisible, it is usually @Pancho that gets the blame whether he has been online or not. Fortunately his skin is now thicker than an elephant's.

Ultimately the buck always stops at me.

Well done Pancho for having the character required for moderating.

It’s your forum so you can obviously do as you wish but you are in heavy denial if you consider the boards rules are applied evenly, especially with undercover moderators who are almost 100% politically left/far left - a direct reflection of yourself who I assume is hand picking these individuals.

It’s astonishing to see what your fellow lefty members get away with compared to politically right members who appear heavily censored.

‘Its always essential to know what people really think, censorship doesn’t actually change peoples opinions, it encourages them to talk to people they already agree with. All you are trying to do is avoid the unpleasantness of knowing what people really think.’
(Greg Lukianoff)

Please consider selecting obvious centre, centre right individuals for moderation to provide some sort of balance. Gillythedilf offered to be a mod recently.

Your politics forum is nothing more than mostly a far left echo chamber with some threads acting like an online cult - The Trump thread an obvious example of a very unhealthy groupthink collective obsessing to ever increasing degrees of hate and empowered by far left moderation. Even from a technical point of view that thread is unreadable due to its behemoth size.